Word: inf
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...interest and verifiability. It is not in the Soviet interest to limit development of strategic weapons. SALT I utterly failed, as the Soviets showed with the largest (and ostensibly secret) nuclear buildup in history during the '70s. It is also apparently not in their interest to limit Euromissiles. The INF negotiations never had a chance, since the Soviets see their interest in holding a monopoly of these weapons as a political tool over both Western and Eastern Europe. They even have begun forward deployment of SS-20s-in East Germany. However, the failure of these talks is only dangerous...
...talks on each type have been held on and off for the past 13 or 14 years. SALT, begun in the early '70's with the start of detente, became START under the Reagan Administration. Its subject has been ICBMs, SLBMs (Submarine Launched Balistic Missiles), and intercontinental bombers. The INF (intermediate Nuclear Force) negotiations deal with the so-called "Euromissiles." These nuclear devices--the Pershing. If ballistic missile, the Tomahawk cruise missile, and the Soviet SS-20-fit somewhat awkwardly into the "tactical" category. They are capable of striking all of Europe, including European Russia in a matter of minutes...
...interesting to compare each of these talks-albeit suspended--to the sequence of events in The Day After. Considering the staggering amount of overkill capacity possessed by both superpowers, it can safely be concluded that no conceivable START agreement could have saved Lawrence, Kansas. The INF negotiations are even more peripheral to the story's outcome. The airburst weapons used in the movie were either bombs or rockets launched from planes, ground-launched short-range rockets, or artillery-launched weapons. Both sides possess thousands of these small devices, and they have never been the subject of bilateral negotiation...
...Warsaw Pact nuclear arsenals, the fragile promise that binds the Alliance should and inevitably will have to be considered. And now is a good time for the Democrats to bring such discussion into the political mainstream. Moreover, with the President unable to bring the Soviet back to the INF and Strategic Arms negotiating tables. No First Use proponents can present a particularly timely arguments...
...withdrawal of the U.S.S.R. from the INF talks of course worries us. The Soviet position on this seems to me to overlook the fact that their deployment of SS-20s threatened the balance of power in Europe in the first place. I urge Mr. Andropov to think again on this. In the longer term, I believe that both superpowers have compelling reasons of acute national interest to pursue arms-control agreements. Progress will probably be achieved in gradual steps and only after difficult negotiations...